Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1887-01-07

|
should vary from right line bctwecl
the trrmini, but also upon the poin
which should be decided upon as th'
junction Of the main and branch lines
conditions which made the aggregat,
of the grant SO uncertain that officer
OF the Land Department of the Gov
crnment differed in their estimate
| thereof to the extent of at least fOu
million acres. And not only did thi!
uncertainty exist at the date Of tn,
passage of this resolution, but, under
the new conditions thereby established
it could never become certain, since
it could never be known where the
main line would have been located un
der the original act, as it could not bt
presumed that under the new cOndi
tions which allowed it to be built down
the Columbia, it would not largely de
part from what would have been its
location under the original act; MOI
could it ever be determined at what
point on the main line the branch tC
Portland would have commenced.
1t follows that the grant as an aggre.
gate whole, both as to the main and
branch lines, was, as to the amount
thereof and its final exact loca ton, SC
indefinite and uncertain as to make
void any reference thereto as measur-
ing the limitations of the grant pro-
vided for in this resolution for the
changed objects to be accomplished.
Nor can it be said that the words
used referred 20 grant per mile, but
only for the number of miles provided
for in the original act, as for the rea-
sons above stated, such number OF
miles was, and under the change au-
thorlzedb by the resolution always would
be, unknown and indcterminablc.
The words " the same grant" must
refer to a grant by the mile, and if this
is so then it clearly appears that the re-
solution authorized the company to
construct its main line by way of the
valley of the Columbia to the Sound
with the same grant of land per mile
for the entire length of the line thus
constructed, as was provided in its
original act of incorporation, and that
as the line of road from Kalama to Ia
coma has been located and constructed
rs Il part of such main line, said grant
attached thereto from the date of its
definite location.
The reasonable and necessary con-
struction of the resolution above re-
fcrred to, then, is such as to compel me
to hold that grant was thereby made
rs claimed by the company. And il
We examine the same in the light OF
the remainder of the resolution such
construction will be much strength.
ened, for there is not single word in
consistent Herewith while to con.
strue it as intended by the government
would render several words and clauses
unnecessary and ambiguous if not alb
solutcly contradictory.
Besides, would Congress, when au-
thorizing the building of two thousand
miles of road, all but two hundred and
fifty of which were heavily subsidized
be likely to require the completion, un
der pain of forfeiture OF the lands
granted, of the unsubsidized part in ad
vance of that thus heavily subsidized
Yet this is what Congress did if you
construe the resolution as contended
for by the government.
1t follows that, in my opinion, the
construction of this resolution is reas
onably clear and certain from the face
thereof, and that, therefore, the door is
not open for the application of any
other rule of construction than that
furnished by reasonable and fair in
depreciation of the language used.
But if we assume the contrary and
find that the language is so far ambi
guous and uncertain as to authorize
the Use of extraneous aid in its con
struction, and aided thereby, proceed
with the investigation, we shall not ar
rive at different result.
The rules governing in the construc
ton of such statutes are we'll under.
stood, and we will briefly look at this
resolution as though it We're ambi
guous, and in aid OF such ambiguity
bring in such extraneous circumstan
ces as are warranted by the rules above
referred to.
Counsel for the government ha.
largely relied upon the position that al
this is private act it should be con
strued strongly in favor of the govern
ment and against the adverse party.
This proposition is undoubtedly cor
rect, and / entirely agree with counse
in regard thereto, but this rule onl,
applies where the construction is no
only inherently doubtful but atill re
mains so after all the aids to its con
struction authorized by law have beer
made use of for if an act in itself un
certain is, by means Of II recognize,
aid in its Interpretation, made certain
the ambiguity is removed, and til,
courts NH therefore treat the act Il
though such certainty was apparent OF
the face thereof.
The n,'.t that can possibly be sus
tanned by the government as to thi
resolution, is, that the intention t,
make the grant in question is no